[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48cfcbf3-0084-7b17-f30d-371bbb5cbdde@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 15:28:25 +0000
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Eugeniy Paltsev <eugeniy.paltsev@...opsys.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>
Cc: "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta1@...opsys.com>,
Alexey Brodkin <alexey.brodkin@...opsys.com>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com"
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"namhyung@...nel.org" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"jolsa@...hat.com" <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: 'branches' perf event mapping differs on ARC and ARM
On 27/11/2018 14:36, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While playing with perf tool on ARMv7 and ARCv2 processors and profiling the
> same application I got interesting results. Even if we got pretty
> similar total
> execution time and instructions number the number of branches on ARC is about
> three times more then on ARM.
>
> I dug into architecture
> specific perf sources and found that we map different
> HW counters into generic 'branches' event on ARC and ARM.
> - We use "ijmp" event on ARC which
> counts all jump and branch instructions (regardless
> of real execution flow - even if no real jump happens)
> - We use "pc_write_retired" event on ARM
> which counts only taken branches (Instruction
> architecturally executed, condition check pass - software change of the PC)
>
> So I was wondering do you know
> which approach is correct?
>
>
>
> I guess counting all jump and branch instructions is correct because we use
> 'branches' event value to calculate relative value of 'branch-misses' using
>
> following formula:
> ----------------------------8----------------------------
> branch-misses-ration = 'branch-misses' / 'branches' * 100.0
> ----------------
> ------------8----------------------------
> And using only taken branches here is incorrect IMHO. So I guess we should
> map 'br_immed_retired' instead of
> "pc_write_retired" into generic 'branches'
> event on ARM.
But register branches (including procedure returns) are also branches,
so only counting immediate branches would be just as, if not more,
misleading.
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists